Publication number | US6598189 B1 |

Publication type | Grant |

Application number | US 09/560,648 |

Publication date | Jul 22, 2003 |

Filing date | Apr 28, 2000 |

Priority date | Apr 28, 2000 |

Fee status | Paid |

Publication number | 09560648, 560648, US 6598189 B1, US 6598189B1, US-B1-6598189, US6598189 B1, US6598189B1 |

Inventors | Wen Zhao, Robert Charles Elliott, Xin Jin |

Original Assignee | Nortel Networks Limited |

Export Citation | BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan |

Patent Citations (14), Referenced by (15), Classifications (10), Legal Events (7) | |

External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet | |

US 6598189 B1

Abstract

A method of determining the actual transmission rate in a variable transmission rate communication system is provided, using error detection metrics. The received symbols are decoded assuming each possible rate, and then re-encoded to determine a symbol error rate for each possible rate. The possible transmission rates are then narrowed down using a simple measure of the likelihood of error, such as the CRC status determined for each rate. The symbol error rates are compared to either make a confident decision as to the actual transmission rate or to erase the frame. Rather than compare the values of the symbol error rates with predetermined thresholds, the method compares the differences between the symbol error rates for each possible rate with predetermined thresholds. This results in fewer erasures, even if the symbol error rates are low due to high signal to noise ratios.

Claims(39)

1. In a communication system having a transmitting system which transmits a frame to a receiving system, the frame being transmitted at an actual transmission rate which is one of a plurality of possible transmission rates, the receiving system generating an error check value for each possible transmission rate and an error rate value for each possible transmission rate, a method for determining at the receiving system the actual transmission rate comprising the steps of:

determining whether exactly two error check values are positive, one error check value having a corresponding first error check rate and the other error check value having a corresponding second error check rate, and if so, the further steps of:

determining whether the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is less than a first predetermined threshold; and

if the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is less than the first predetermined threshold, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the first error rate value, and otherwise, the further steps of:

determining whether the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than a second predetermined threshold; and

if the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than the second predetermined threshold, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the second error rate value, and otherwise, the further step of:

generating a signal to erase the frame;

if other than exactly two of the error check values are positive, determining whether exactly one of the error check values is positive, and if so, the further steps of:

for each of the error rate values corresponding to an error check value which is negative, determining whether the difference between the error rate value corresponding to the error rate value which is positive and the error rate value corresponding to the error check value which is negative is less than a predetermined threshold particular to the two possible transmission rates corresponding to the error check value which is positive and the error check value which is negative; and

if each difference between the error rate value corresponding to the error check value which is positive and an error rate value corresponding to an error check value which is negative is less than the predetermined threshold particular to the two corresponding rates, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate was the possible transmission rate corresponding to the error check value which was positive, and otherwise, the further step of:

generating a signal to erase the frame;

if other than exactly two of the error check values are positive and other than exactly one of the error check values is positive, generating a signal to erase the frame.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the error check values are cyclic redundancy check values.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein the error check values are Yamamoto check values.

4. The method of claim 1 wherein each of the thresholds is predetermined empirically based on a desired performance of the communication system, there being two such thresholds for each combination of possible transmission rates.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein the communication system is a code division multiple access communication system.

6. The method of claim 5 wherein the error rate values are symbol error rates.

7. The method of claim 5 wherein the error rate values are normalized symbol error rates.

8. The method of claim 5 wherein the error check values are cyclic redundancy check values.

9. The method of claim 5 wherein the error check values are Yamamoto check values.

10. The method of claim 1 wherein the further steps carried out if exactly one of the error check values is positive, includes the further step of:

determining if the possible transmission rate corresponding to the error check value which was positive is the maximum of the possible transmission rates, and if so, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the maximum of the possible transmission rates.

11. The method of claim 10 wherein the error check values are cyclic redundancy check values.

12. The method of claim 10 wherein the error check values are Yamamoto check values.

13. The method of claim 10 wherein each of the thresholds is predetermined empirically based on a desired performance of the communication system, there being two such thresholds for each combination of possible transmission rates.

14. The method of claim 10 wherein the communication system is a code division multiple access communication system.

15. The method of claim 14 wherein the error rate values are symbol error rates.

16. The method of claim 14 wherein the error rate values are normalized symbol error rates.

17. The method of claim 14 wherein the error check values are cyclic redundancy check values.

18. The method of claim 14 wherein the error check values are Yamamoto check values.

19. A processor in a receiving system of a communication system, the communication system having a transmitting system which transmits a frame to the receiving system, the frame being transmitted at an actual transmission rate which is one of a plurality of possible transmission rates, the receiving system generating an error check value for each possible transmission rate and an error rate value for each possible transmission rate, the error check values and the error rate values being passed to the processor, and the processor containing instructions for:

determining whether exactly two of the error check values are positive, one error check value having a corresponding first error check rate and the other error check value having a corresponding second error check rate, and if so:

determining whether the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is less than a first predetermined threshold; and

if the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is less than the first predetermined threshold, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the first error rate value, and otherwise:

determining whether the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than a second predetermined threshold; and

if the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than the second predetermined threshold, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the second error rate value, and otherwise:

generating a signal to erase the frame;

if other than exactly two of the error check values are positive, determining whether exactly one of the error check values is positive, and if so:

for each of the error rate values corresponding to an error check value which is negative, determining whether the difference between the error rate value corresponding to the error rate value which is positive and the error rate value corresponding to the error check value which is negative is less than a predetermined threshold particular to the two possible transmission rates corresponding to the error check value which is positive and the error check value which is negative; and

if each difference between the error rate value corresponding to the error check value which is positive and an error rate value corresponding to an error check value which is negative is less than the predetermined threshold particular to the two corresponding rates, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate was the possible transmission rate corresponding to the error check value which was positive, and otherwise:

generating a signal to erase the frame;

if other than exactly two of the error check values are positive and other than exactly one of the error check values is positive, generating a signal to erase the frame.

20. The processor of claim 19 wherein the error check values are cyclic redundancy check values.

21. The processor of claim 19 wherein the error check values are Yamamoto check values.

22. The processor of claim 19 wherein the communication system is a code division multiple access communication system.

23. The processor of claim 22 wherein the error rate values are symbol error rates.

24. The processor of claim 22 wherein the error rate values are normalized:symbol error rates.

25. The processor of claim 22 wherein the error check values are cyclic redundancy check values.

26. The processor of claim 22 wherein the error check values are Yamamoto check values.

27. The processor of claim 19 wherein the instructions carried out if exactly one of the error check values is positive, further include:

determining if the possible transmission rate corresponding to the error check value which was positive is the maximum of the possible transmission rates, and if so, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the maximum of the possible transmission rates.

28. The processor of claim 27 wherein the error check values are cyclic redundancy check values.

29. The processor of claim 27 wherein the error check values are Yamamoto check values.

30. The processor of claim 27 wherein the communication system is a code division multiple access communication system.

31. The processor of claim 30 wherein the error rate values are symbol error rates.

32. The processor of claim 30 wherein the error rate values are normalized symbol error rates.

33. The processor of claim 30 wherein the error check values are cyclic redundancy check values.

34. The processor of claim 30 wherein the error check values are Yamamoto check values.

35. In a communication system having a transmitting system which transmits a frame to a receiving system, the frame being transmitted at an actual transmission rate which is one of a plurality of possible transmission rates, the receiving system generating an error check value for each possible transmission rate and an error rate value for each possible transmission rate, the receiving system comprising:

means for determining whether exactly two of the error check values are positive, one error check value having a corresponding first error rate value and the other error check value having a corresponding second error check value;

means for determining whether the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is less than a first predetermined threshold;

means for generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the first error rate value in the event that the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is less than the first predetermined threshold;

means for determining whether the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than a second predetermined threshold in the even that the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than the first predetermined threshold;

means for generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the second error rate value in the event that the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than the second predetermined threshold;

means for generating a signal to erase the frame in the event that the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than the first predetermined threshold and is less than the second predetermined threshold;

means for determining whether exactly one of the error check values is positive;

means for determining whether the differences between the error rate value corresponding to the exactly one error check value and each of the error rate values corresponding to an error check value which was negative is greater than a predetermined threshold particular to the two possible transmission rates corresponding to the error check value which is positive and the error check value which is negative;

means for generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate was the possible transmission rate corresponding to the exactly one error check value which was positive in the event that the differences between the error rate value corresponding to the exactly one error check value which was positive and each of the error rate values corresponding to an error check value which was negative was less than the predetermined threshold particular to the two corresponding rates;

means for generating a signal to erase the frame in the event that any of the differences between the error rate value corresponding to the exactly one error check value which was positive and an error rate value corresponding to an error check value which was negative is greater than the predetermined threshold particular to the two corresponding rates;

means for generating a signal to erase the frame in the event that other than exactly two of the error check values are positive and other than exactly one of the error check values is positive.

36. The receiving system of claim 35 further comprising:

means for determining if the possible transmission rate corresponding to the exactly one error check value which was positive is the maximum of the possible transmission rates; and

means for generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the maximum of the possible transmission rates in the event that the possible transmission rate corresponding to the exactly one error check value which was positive is the maximum of the possible transmission rates.

37. In a communication system having a transmitting system which transmits a frame to a receiving system, the frame being transmitted at an actual transmission rate which is one of a plurality of possible transmission rates, the receiving system generating an error check value for each possible transmission rate and an error rate value for each possible transmission rate, a method for determining at the receiving system the actual transmission rate comprising the steps of:

determining whether exactly two of the error check values are positive, and if so, the further steps of:

determining whether exactly two error check values are positive, one error check value having a corresponding first error check rate and the other error check value having a corresponding second error check rate, and if so, the further steps of:

determining whether the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is less than a first predetermined threshold; and

if the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is less than the first predetermined threshold, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the first error rate value, and otherwise, the further steps of:

determining whether the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than a second predetermined threshold; and

if the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than the second predetermined threshold, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the second error rate value, and otherwise, the further step of:

generating a signal to erase the frame.

38. In a communication system having a transmitting system which transmits a frame to a receiving system, the frame being transmitted at an actual transmission rate which is one of a plurality of possible transmission rates, the receiving system generating an error check value for each possible transmission rate and an error rate value for each possible transmission rate, a method for determining at the receiving system the actual transmission rate comprising the steps of:

determining whether exactly one of the error check values is positive, and if so, the further steps of:

for each of the error rate values corresponding to an error check value which is negative, determining whether the difference between the error rate value corresponding to the error rate value which is positive and the error rate value corresponding to the error check value which is negative is less than a predetermined threshold particular to the two possible transmission rates corresponding to the error check value which is positive and the error check value which is negative; and

if each difference between the error rate value corresponding to the error check value which is positive and an error rate value corresponding to an error check value which is negative is less than the predetermined threshold particular to the two corresponding rates, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate was the possible transmission rate corresponding to the error check value which was positive, and otherwise, the further step of:

generating a signal to erase the frame.

39. The method of claim 38 wherein the further steps carried out if exactly one of the error check values is positive, includes the further step of:

determining if the possible transmission rate corresponding to the error check value which was positive is the maximum of the possible transmission rates, and if so, generating a signal to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the maximum of the possible transmission rates.

Description

This invention relates to variable rate digital communication systems, and more particularly to the determination of the rate in a such systems.

In code division multiple access (CDMA) communication systems, a transmitting system transmits data to a receiving system. Within the transmitting system, a data source sends a stream of data frames to a Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC) and tail bit generator. The generator generates a set of CRC bits for each data frame, which are attached to the data frame for use in error detection by the receiving system. The data frames are then sent to an encoder which encodes the data as symbols. The symbols are then interleaved, modulated, and transmitted as a signal to the receiving system. Within the receiving system, the stream of symbols are demodulated, combined with the symbols of the same signal which travelled along a different propagation path, and de-interleaved. The resulting re-ordered stream of symbols is then passed to a decoder, which outputs a decoded data frame and performs a CRC check.

If the data being transmitted is voice data, a user does not require continual full use of the system. For example, there will be times when the user is not speaking. Therefore variable transmission rates are often used to reduce the number of symbols transmitted, thereby saving power. For example, in IS-95 networks four transmission rates are used. When a user is speaking, the transmission rate is at a full rate. When a user is not speaking, the transmission rate is at an eighth rate, equal to one eighth of the full rate. During transition between full rate and eighth rate the data may be transmitted at a half rate (equal to one half of the full rate) and at a quarter rate (equal to one quarter of the full rate).

In order to accurately decode the transmitted signal, the decoder must know the rate at which the symbols were actually transmitted. However this information is not transmitted with the symbols, and a processor within the receiving system must attempt to determine the actual transmission rate. There are three possible results when attempting to determine the transmission rate. The processor may determine the correct rate, may determine an incorrect rate, or may be unable to determine a rate. If the processor is unable to determine a rate the symbols are dropped, resulting in an erasure of the decoded data frame. It may be preferable to erase a decoded data frame if the processor is not confident enough that it has determined the actual transmission rate, because sending a decoded data frame based on an incorrect transmission rate can result in the receiving user being exposed to unpleasant noise.

Error detection metrics can be used to assist in the attempt to determine the correct rate, as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,566,206 issued to Butler et al. on Oct. 15, 1996. A decoder is used for each possible transmission rate to generate a decoded frame for each possible transmission rate, each of which is stored in a buffer. Error detection techniques are then applied to each decoded frame to determine various error detection metrics for each rate. Possible error detection metrics are the CRC status, the Symbol Error Rate (SER), and the Yamamoto value. A comparison of the error detection metrics allows the processor to make a decision as to which of the possible rates was most likely used in the transmission. If a decision is made, the processor signals the appropriate buffer and the decoded frame corresponding to that rate is passed on to the receiving user. Otherwise, if the error correction parameters are such that the processor cannot make a decision as to which is the correct rate, then the data frame is erased.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,751,725 issued to Chen on May 12, 1998 discloses one such method of determining the rate in a variable transmission rate system. The processor determines whether the CRC statuses for exactly two of the decoded frames are positive. If so, the processor compares the SERs for these two decoded frames after applying a linear function to one of the two SERs. The parameters of the linear function are predetermined empirically, and are necessary to correct for normalization of the SERs and for the differences in probability of a positive CRC status for different transmission rates. The comparison of the SERs reveals which of the two rates is more likely to be the actual transmission rate. The SER for the decoded frame whose rate is most likely to be the actual transmission rate is then compared with a maximum threshold SER for that rate (predetermined empirically based on the desired performance). If the SER is below the maximum threshold, then the processor assumes that the determined rate is the actual transmission rate and signals the buffer to send the corresponding decoded frame to the receiving user. If the SER is above the maximum threshold, then the processor is not confident that it has found the actual transmission rate. An erasure is signalled, and no decoded frame is sent to the receiving user.

If the CRC status of exactly one decoded frame is positive, then the processor begins by assuming that the rate corresponding to that frame is most likely to be the actual transmission rate but must then reassure itself that the rate is most likely the actual transmission rate. The processor compares the SER of the decoded frame for which the CRC status was positive with a maximum threshold SER for the rate corresponding to the decoded frame. If the SER of the frame is above the maximum threshold SER, then the frame is erased. If the SER of the frame is below the maximum threshold SER, then this is additional confirmation that this decoded frame was decoded using the correct rate. However, as further checks the processor compares the SERs of each of the other decoded frames with a minimum threshold SER. A minimum threshold SER is determined empirically for each combination of two different rates, so in a communication system using four possible rates there are twelve minimum threshold SERs. If the SER of any of the other decoded frames is less than the minimum threshold SER, then it is quite possible that the rate of the other decoded frame was the actual transmission rate. The uncertainty as to which of the two rates (the rate indicated by the positive CRC status or the rate indicated by the low SER) is most likely to be the actual transmission rate results in an erasure of the data frame by the processor.

One disadvantage of the method disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,751,725 is that it compares absolute SERs with predetermined minimum thresholds. Under certain conditions the signal to noise ratio of the transmitted signal can be particularly high. When this occurs the SERs determined for more than one transmission rate may be low and there is a good chance that more than one will fall below the minimum relevant threshold SER. The method disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,751,725 would then result in a high number of unnecessary erasures. A method of determining the transmission rate which does not result in these unnecessary erasures would provide more a complete signal to the receiving user.

The present invention provides a method for determining at a receiving system an actual transmission rate in a communication system having a transmitting system which transmits a frame to the receiving system. The frame is transmitted at the actual transmission rate which can be one of several possible transmission rates. The receiving system generates an error check value for each possible transmission rate and an error rate value for each possible transmission rate. If exactly two error check values are positive, one error check value having a corresponding first error check rate and the other error check value having a corresponding second error check rate, a difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is calculated. If the difference is less than a first predetermined threshold, a signal is generated to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the first error rate value. Otherwise, if the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than a second predetermined threshold a signal is generated to indicate that the actual transmission rate is the possible transmission rate corresponding to the second error rate value. If the difference between the first error rate value and the second error rate value is greater than the first predetermined threshold and less than the second predetermined threshold, a signal is generated to erase the frame.

If exactly one of the error check values is positive, then the error rate value corresponding to the error check value which was positive is compared with each of the error rate values corresponding to the error check values which were negative. If each difference between the error rate value corresponding to the error check value which is positive and an error rate value corresponding to an error check value which is negative is less than a predetermined threshold particular to the two possible transmission rates corresponding to the error check value which was positive and the error check value which was negative, a signal is generated to indicate that the actual transmission rate was the possible transmission rate corresponding to the error check value which was positive. Otherwise, a signal is generated to erase the frame.

If other than exactly two of the error check values are positive and other than exactly one of the error check values is positive, a signal is generated to erase the frame.

This method determines erasures by comparing the differences between error rate values (most likely SERs) with predetermined thresholds rather than comparing the error rate values themselves with predetermined thresholds. This results in fewer unnecessary erasures.

The steps carried out if exactly two error check values (most likely CRCs) is positive and the steps carried out if exactly one error check value is positive can be implemented separately and still result in fewer unnecessary erasures.

Other aspects and features of the present invention will become apparent to those ordinarily skilled in the art upon review of the following description of specific embodiments of the invention in conjunction with the accompanying figures.

The invention will now be described in greater detail with reference to the accompanying diagrams, in which:

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a variable rate communication system;

FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing the data flow following the de-interleaving of the transmitted symbols for a transmission system having four possible transmission rates;

FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing high level steps in the rate determination method of the invention;

FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing detailed steps in the rate determination method of the invention when exactly two decoded frames have positive CRC statuses;

FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing detailed steps in the rate determination method of the invention when exactly one decoded frame has a positive CRC status; and

FIG. 6 is a flowchart showing detailed steps in an alternate embodiment of the rate determination method of the invention when exactly one decoded frame has a positive CRC status.

FIG. 1 shows a CDMA communication system, in which a transmitting system **250** sends a signal **265** in the form of a stream of symbols to a receiving system **266** at an actual transmission rate which is one of several possible transmission rates. Within the receiving system, the symbols are received by an antenna **268** and receiver **270**, demodulated at **272**, combined at **274** with the symbols of the same signal which travelled along a different propagation path, and de-interleaved at **276**. The resulting re-ordered stream of symbols is then passed to a decoder system **278**. The decoder system **278** is shown in greater detail in FIG. **2**. The re-ordered stream of symbols **17** is passed to each of several decoder blocks **10**, **12**, **14** and **16**, one decoder block for each possible transmission rate. In FIG. 2, and in what will be described hereafter, there are four possible transmission rates: a full rate, a half rate which is one half of the full rate, a quarter rate which is one quarter of the full rate, and an eighth rate which is one eighth of the full rate. This is in accordance with the Telecommunication Industry Association's IS-95 Standard. The half rate decoder block **12**, the quarter rate decoder block **14**, and the eighth rate decoder block **16** contain the same components as the full rate decoder block **10**, although as will be described below some of the components function slightly differently in each decoder block.

Within the full rate decoder block **10** the stream of symbols **18** is passed to a Viterbi decoder **20**. The decoder **20** decodes the stream of symbols **18** assuming that the actual transmission rate was equal to the full rate. The decoder **20** produces as output a decoded frame **22**. The decoded frame **22** is passed to a CRC circuit **25** which determines a CRC status of the decoded frame **22**. The CRC circuit **25** passes a CRC status bit (CRC_{1}) **28**, whose value depends on the CRC status of the decoded frame **22**, to a processor **52**.

The decoded frame **22** is also passed to an encoder **24**, which assumes the actual transmission rate was equal to the full rate and re-encodes the decoded frame **22** to produce re-encoded symbols **26**. A comparator **27** compares the received symbols **18** with the re-encoded symbols **26** to determine a Symbol Error Rate (SER_{1}) **32**. The more differences there are between the received symbols **18** and the re-encoded symbols **26**, the higher will be the SER **32**.

The decoded frame **22** is also passed to a buffer (not shown).

The half rate decoder block **12** performs the same functions as the full rate decoder block **10**, except that the Viterbi decoder **20**, the re-encoder **24**, and the comparator **27** assume that the transmission rate was equal to the half rate. The comparator **27** also normalizes the SER. The normalization is necessary because there are fewer re-encoded symbols **26** if the re-encoder **24** assumes a lower transmission rate, and this will result in a lower SER in the half rate decoder block even if the proportion of inconsistent symbols is the same in the half rate decoder block **12** as in the full rate decoder block **10**. The normalization is accomplished simply by multiplying the SER determined in the half rate decoder block **12** by the full rate and dividing by the half rate. The normalized SER (SER_{2}) **38** determined in the half rate encoder block is passed to the processor **52**, along with the CRC status bit (CRC_{2}) **34** determined based on the half rate. The decoded frame **36** produced by the Viterbi decoder **20** using the half rate is passed to the buffer.

Similarly, the quarter rate decoder block **14** sends a normalized SER (SER_{4}) **44** and a CRC status bit (CRC_{4}) **40** to the processor **52**, where SER_{4 } **44** and CRC_{4 } **40** are determined using the quarter rate. The decoded frame **42** produced by the Viterbi decoder **20** using the quarter rate is passed to the buffer.

Finally, the eighth rate decoder block **16** sends a normalized SER (SER_{8}) **50** and a CRC status bit (CRC_{8}) **46** to the processor **52**, where SER_{8 } **50** and CRC_{8 } **46** are determined using the eighth rate. The decoded frame **48** produced by the Viterbi decoder **20** using the eighth rate is passed to the buffer.

The processor **52** compares the error detection metrics (consisting of CRC_{1 } **28**, CRC_{2 } **34**, CRC_{4 } **40**, CRC_{8 } **46**, SER_{1 } **32**, SER_{2 } **38**, SER_{4 } **44**, and SER_{8 } **50**) to determine a rate or, if unable to determine a rate with confidence, to determine that an erasure should occur. The high level routine is shown in FIG. **3**. The routine starts **100** when it receives a complete set of error detection metrics. If the processor determines at step **102** that exactly two CRC statuses were positive (as indicated by the values of CRC_{1 } **28**, CRC_{2 } **34**, CRC_{4 } **40**, CRC_{8 } **46**), then a routine for two positive CRC statuses is carried out at step **104** (described in more detail in FIG. **4**). If the processor determines at step **102** that other than exactly two CRC statuses were positive, then the processor determines at step **106** whether exactly one CRC status was positive. If exactly one CRC status was positive, then a routine for one positive CRC status is carried out at step **108** (described in more detail in FIG. **5**). If the processor determines at step **106** that other than exactly one CRC status was positive, then the processor signals the buffer to erase the data frame at step **110**. An erasure is requested because either zero, three, or four CRC statuses were positive and the processor is unable to determine the actual transmission rate with any certainty.

FIG. 4 shows step **104**, the routine carried out when exactly two CRC statuses are positive, in greater detail. The routine starts **150** if the processor determines that exactly two CRC statuses were positive at step **102** in FIG. **3**. In FIG. 4 the two rates for which the CRC statuses were positive are represented by subscripts i and j. If the processor determines at step **160** that the difference between SER_{i }(the SER measured assuming a transmission rate of i) and SER_{j }(the SER measured assuming a transmission rate of j) is less than a threshold T_{ij}, then the processor assumes at step **164** that the rate at which the symbols were transmitted is i. The threshold T_{ij}, and all thresholds used in the method of the invention, may be positive or negative and are predetermined empirically based on desired performance. If the difference at step **160** is greater than T_{ij}, then the processor determines at step **154** whether the difference between SERi and SERj is greater than a threshold T_{ji}. T_{ji }is predetermined empirically based on desired performance and may be positive or negative, but will not be greater than T_{ij}. If the difference at step **154** is greater than T_{ji }then processor assumes at step **156** that the rate at which the symbols were transmitted is j. If the difference at step **160** is greater than T_{ij }and the difference at step **154** is less than T_{ji}, then the two values of SER were close enough that the processor is uncertain which is the correct rate, and an erasure occurs at step **162**.

The thresholds are determined empirically based on the desired performance of the communication system, and will depend on the rates for which the SERs are being compared. For example, given an acceptable wrong decision rate and an acceptable erasure rate, the thresholds when i represents the quarter rate and j represents the eighth rate may be determined empirically to be T_{ij}=−10 and T_{ji}=20. Suppose for a particular set of symbols SER_{i }is determined to have a value of 30. If SER_{j }is determined to have a value of 50, then the difference at step **160** is less than T_{ij }and the rate is assumed to be i (the quarter rate in this example) at step **164**. If SER_{j }is determined to have a value of 5, then the difference at step **160** is greater than T_{ij}. The difference at step **154** is greater than T_{ji }and the rate is assumed to be j (the eighth rate in this example) at step **156**. Finally, if SER_{j }is determined to have a value of 20, then the difference is greater than T_{ij }and less than T_{ji}, and an erasure will occur at step **162**.

It should be noted that counter-intuitive results can occur if T_{ij}>0. With values of T_{ij}=20, SER_{i}=40, and SER_{j}=30, then the rate would be assumed to be i even though the SER for rate i was larger than the SER for rate j. However this may be reasonable if rate i is much more likely to occur statistically than rate j. If both CRC_{i }and CRC_{j }are positive, then rate i is preferred unless SER_{i }is significantly higher than SER_{j}. This will be reflected in the empirical determination of T_{ij}.

FIG. 5 shows step **108**, the routine carried out when exactly one CRC status is positive, in greater detail. The routine starts **200** if the processor determines that exactly one CRC status was positive at step **106** in FIG. **3**. In FIG. 5, the rate which had a positive CRC status is represented by the subscript i, and the other rates are represented by the subscripts j, k, and l. The processor determines at step **202** whether the difference between SER_{i }and SER_{j }is less than a threshold T_{ij}. If the difference is greater than the threshold T_{ij }then there is one error detection metric, CRC_{i}, indicating that the rate should be i and one error detection metric, SER_{j}, indicating that the rate should be j. The processor is unable to determine the rate with any certainty, and an erasure occurs at step **208**. If the processor determines at step **202** that the difference between SER_{i }and SER_{j }is less than the threshold T_{ij}, then the processor carries out similar comparisons between SER_{i }and SER_{k}, and between SER_{i }and SER_{1 }at steps **204** and **206** respectively. In each case, if SER_{i }is not sufficiently less than the SER for the other rate then the processor signals an erasure at step **208**. If SER_{i }is sufficiently less than the SER for all three of the other rates, then the processor is confident at step **210** that the rate is i.

FIG. 6 shows alternative steps to those shown in FIG. **5**. These alternative steps can shorten the execution time of the rate determination by assuming that the CRC status for the full rate is much more likely to be accurate since there are more symbols present for the full rate. The processor first determines at step **201** whether the rate for which the CRC status was positive was the full rate. If so, then the processor is confident at step **203** that the rate is the full rate, without needing to carry out comparisons between the SERs. If the processor determines at step **201** that the rate for which the CRC status was positive was not the full rate, then the processor carries out the same steps as in FIG. 5, as described above.

When the processor determines that an erasure should occur, either because no CRC statuses were positive, more than two CRC statuses were positive, or because of ambiguity between the rate suggested by the CRC statuses and the rate suggested by the SERs, then the processor signals the buffer to erase the decoded frames produced by the Viterbi decoder **20** in each decoder block. If the processor is able to determine a rate with confidence, then the processor signals the buffer to send the decoded frame corresponding to that rate to the receiving user.

Although the methods described use the CRC status to determine which further steps to carry out, the CRC status is merely the most conventional error detection metric. Since the purpose of the CRC status is to screen out unlikely rates, other single bit error detection metrics could be used as error check values. For example, the processor could determine at step **102** in FIG. 3 whether exactly two rates have a positive Yamamoto bit, and could determine at step **106** whether exactly one rate has a positive Yamamoto bit.

The method has been described with reference to a version of a CDMA system having four possible transmission rates. Future versions of CDMA systems which employ more than four possible transmission rates are also within the scope of the invention. In such systems, FIG. 5 would be extended by comparing the SER for the rate for which the CRC status was positive with the SERs for the additional rates. If the difference between SER_{i }and the SER for any of the other possible rates is greater than a predetermined threshold (there being a threshold for each combination of two rates) then the processor signals an erasure. The scope of the invention is also not limited to CDMA systems. The invention can be used in any variable transmission rate communication system in which an error check value (such as the CRC) and an error rate value (such as the SER) can be determined for each possible transmission rate.

The steps carried out if exactly two error check values (most likely CRCs) is positive and the steps carried out if exactly one error check value is positive can be implemented separately and still result in fewer unnecessary erasures.

What has been described is merely illustrative of the application of the principles of the invention. Other arrangements and methods can be implemented by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. In particular, other methods which are logically equivalent to the methods described are within the scope of the invention.

Patent Citations

Cited Patent | Filing date | Publication date | Applicant | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|

US5566206 | Apr 26, 1994 | Oct 15, 1996 | Qualcomm Incorporated | Method and apparatus for determining data rate of transmitted variable rate data in a communications receiver |

US5751725 * | Oct 18, 1996 | May 12, 1998 | Qualcomm Incorporated | Method and apparatus for determining the rate of received data in a variable rate communication system |

US5764651 * | May 17, 1996 | Jun 9, 1998 | Integrated Device Technology, Inc. | Bit error rate detection system |

US5774496 * | Jun 4, 1996 | Jun 30, 1998 | Qualcomm Incorporated | Method and apparatus for determining data rate of transmitted variable rate data in a communications receiver |

US5850405 * | Oct 23, 1996 | Dec 15, 1998 | Siemens Aktiengesellschaft | Method for error recognition of a digital bit data stream transmitted by a transmitter to a receiver |

US5968154 * | Jul 24, 1996 | Oct 19, 1999 | Cho; Jin Young | Distributed priority arbitrating method and system in multi-point serial networks with different transmission rates |

US6094465 * | Mar 21, 1997 | Jul 25, 2000 | Qualcomm Incorporated | Method and apparatus for performing decoding of CRC outer concatenated codes |

US6108811 * | Oct 6, 1997 | Aug 22, 2000 | Mitsubishi Denki Kabushiki Kaisha | Error-correcting decoder continuously adding flag signals to locations preceding a first location at which a difference between path metrics is lower than the threshold |

US6141353 * | Mar 7, 1997 | Oct 31, 2000 | Oki Telecom, Inc. | Subsequent frame variable data rate indication method for various variable data rate systems |

US6175590 * | Aug 8, 1997 | Jan 16, 2001 | Qualcomm Inc. | Method and apparatus for determining the rate of received data in a variable rate communication system |

US6182252 * | Mar 22, 1999 | Jan 30, 2001 | Wonderware Corporation | Method and system for efficient packet data transport |

US6209046 * | Jul 24, 1998 | Mar 27, 2001 | International Business Machines Corporation | DMA transfer from a storage unit to a host using at least two transfer rates and cyclic error detection |

US6233708 * | Aug 27, 1999 | May 15, 2001 | Siemens Aktiengesellschaft | Method and device for frame error detection |

US6424631 * | Jun 11, 1998 | Jul 23, 2002 | Infineon Technologies North America Corp. | Apparatus and methods for determining rate of transmitted variable rate data |

Referenced by

Citing Patent | Filing date | Publication date | Applicant | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|

US7451379 * | Sep 23, 2005 | Nov 11, 2008 | Aware, Inc. | CRC counter normalization |

US7765441 * | Jun 26, 2006 | Jul 27, 2010 | Broadcom Corporation | Methods and systems for detecting symbol erasures |

US7925958 | Sep 24, 2008 | Apr 12, 2011 | Aware, Inc. | CRC counter normalization |

US7979778 | May 20, 2010 | Jul 12, 2011 | Aware, Inc. | CRC counter normalization |

US8516337 | Jun 8, 2011 | Aug 20, 2013 | Tq Delta, Llc | CRC counter normalization |

US8793553 | Aug 16, 2013 | Jul 29, 2014 | Tq Delta Llc | CRC counter normalization |

US8984366 | Jul 23, 2014 | Mar 17, 2015 | Tq Delta, Llc | CRC counter normalization |

US9300324 | Mar 4, 2015 | Mar 29, 2016 | Tq Delta, Llc | CRC counter normalization |

US20040213225 * | Apr 28, 2003 | Oct 28, 2004 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Re-use of channel estimation information in a wireless local area network |

US20060045214 * | Aug 30, 2005 | Mar 2, 2006 | Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd | Receiving method and apparatus for variable rate |

US20060069980 * | Sep 23, 2005 | Mar 30, 2006 | Aware, Inc. | CRC counter normalization |

US20060242478 * | Jun 26, 2006 | Oct 26, 2006 | Broadcom Corporation | Methods and systems for detecting symbol erasures |

US20090019346 * | Sep 24, 2008 | Jan 15, 2009 | Aware, Inc. | Crc counter normalization |

US20100293444 * | May 20, 2010 | Nov 18, 2010 | Aware, Inc. | CRC Counter Normalization |

US20110239087 * | Jun 8, 2011 | Sep 29, 2011 | Aware, Inc. | Crc counter normalization |

Classifications

U.S. Classification | 714/708, 714/704, 714/774, 375/225 |

International Classification | H04L25/02, H04L1/00 |

Cooperative Classification | H04L25/0262, H04L1/0061 |

European Classification | H04L25/02J, H04L1/00B7E |

Legal Events

Date | Code | Event | Description |
---|---|---|---|

Apr 28, 2000 | AS | Assignment | Owner name: NORTEL NETWORKS CORPORATION, CANADA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:ZHAO, WEN;ELLIOTT, ROBERT CHARLES;JIN, XIN;REEL/FRAME:010770/0616;SIGNING DATES FROM 20000414 TO 20000419 |

Aug 30, 2000 | AS | Assignment | Owner name: NORTEL NETWORKS LIMITED, CANADA Free format text: CHANGE OF NAME;ASSIGNOR:NORTEL NETWORKS CORPORATION;REEL/FRAME:011195/0706 Effective date: 20000830 Owner name: NORTEL NETWORKS LIMITED,CANADA Free format text: CHANGE OF NAME;ASSIGNOR:NORTEL NETWORKS CORPORATION;REEL/FRAME:011195/0706 Effective date: 20000830 |

Dec 18, 2006 | FPAY | Fee payment | Year of fee payment: 4 |

Dec 28, 2010 | FPAY | Fee payment | Year of fee payment: 8 |

Oct 28, 2011 | AS | Assignment | Owner name: ROCKSTAR BIDCO, LP, NEW YORK Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:NORTEL NETWORKS LIMITED;REEL/FRAME:027164/0356 Effective date: 20110729 |

Jul 26, 2012 | AS | Assignment | Owner name: APPLE INC., CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:ROCKSTAR BIDCO, LP;REEL/FRAME:028649/0001 Effective date: 20120511 |

Dec 31, 2014 | FPAY | Fee payment | Year of fee payment: 12 |

Rotate